9/14: Though we won't be proposing any changes to the stance rules for the 2011
revision, Dr Rick Voakes has been thinking hard about a solution. Here is a recent
note of his with a proposed remedy:

----
Peter had recommended that we not allow follow through after
passing a mark in the fairway that is 40 m from the basket. I would
change this to 30 m, since that is very close to 100 feet (97.5 ft),
so a relatively easy distance to learn to estimate for casual play. I
feel this is plenty of distance to discourage jump putts. And it would
be quicker for TD's to measure.

I would also leave a default, that if no mark is provided, then you
are allowed to have falling putts at any distance (an option we had
already considered anyway). It would not take much for a TD to step
off the distance and poke a flag into the ground on courses where
there is not a permanent marker. If this catches on, most heavily used
courses would probably cement a post into the ground at the edge of
the fairway. Or better yet, plant a stone or cinder block on the line
of play 30 m from the most common pin placement. Most tournaments move
the pins, so flags would still be needed for most tournaments.

I believe this proposal can also solve the problem of players missing
the lie with their plant foot. I had previously proposed enlarging the
"stance zone" to a 60 cm diameter circle. This would be much easier to
hit on a run-up, but might be too large a leeway when you are close to
the basket, and you could get an advantage by stretching an extra 30
cm to the side to get around an obstacle. If we use the 30 m mark for
a "no follow through" line, we could also use it for a "no 60 cm
stance zone" line. Beyond that line, the player would take a stance on
the line of play, as we do (or vaguely attempt to do) now.

I know this proposal sounds a bit radical, but we are definitely going
to have to make a major change in order to solve the stance issue. As
we now play, a very large percentage of even the top pros foot-fault
on almost every shot. If we were to drop the warning for foot-fault,
it would be a disaster. If we do nothing, the sport will start to lose
credibility in the sports world, as more media and photo coverage will
illustrate the laxity of our rules.

So here is a rough draft of a possible revision to 803.04.

803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off
A. When the disc is released, a player must:

(1) have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the
playing surface that is within a stance zone defined by a circle
60 cm in diameter directly behind the marker disc (except as
specified in 803.04 E); and

(2) have no supporting point in contact with the marker disc or any
object closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker disc;
and

(3) have all of his or her supporting points in-bounds. B. Stepping
past the marker disc is permitted, except when throwing from beyond a
fairway marker that is 30 meters from the target.

C. Any throw from beyond the 30-meter fairway marker, as determined by
a majority of the group or an official, is considered an approach
shot. For such a shot, stepping past the marker disc, or making
contact with any object past the marker disc, is not allowed, until
full control of balance is demonstrated. The stance zone for an
approach shot is restricted to the line of play within 30 cm directly
behind the marker disc.

D. A player must choose the stance that will result in the least
movement of any part of any obstacle that is a permanent or integral
part of the course.

E. If a large solid object prevents a player from taking a legal
stance (either within 60 cm, or within 30 cm, whichever applies), the
player shall take his or her stance based on a new lie to be
relocated, without penalty, to the spot directly behind the obstacle
on the line of play. All stance rules will then apply to this new lie.

F. Any stance violation shall incur a one-throw penalty.

[Sections G. and H. are no longer needed, since there are no re-throws.]
----

A small change to 803.02 Teeing Off is needed to provide the penalty:

B. Any supporting point contact outside the teeing area at the time of release constitutes a stance violation and shall incur a one-throw penalty.

If we do keep the original 803.04, which I recommend for now, let's be sure to correct the five (!) typos in that rule, as published in the current rulebook.
----

_________________Boyle says BOOM!

Last edited by Jefrey A. Brother on Mon Nov 29, 2010 1:00 pm; edited 1 time in total

Dr. DG (Volkes?) who is stating that most players are cheating or taking liberties so therefore the rules need to be changed to make sure this doesn't happen anymore. ... He's thinking like you.

Okay, I went and read the page. Everyone means well, but I'm not sure they're doing the right thing. Voakes is throwing complication at the issue (glad to hear he thinks the 10m rule stinks too, but making it 30m is just more of a bad thing). The 60cm circle is outrageous. It allows what would now be considered cheating, and will do nothing for the game, even if taken away inside of the 30m limit.

Would somebody kindly enlighten us as to what rules a MLB pitcher must follow with regards to where their planted foot needs to be during a pitch? I can think of no other situation in pro sports that is as similar to a dg throw. Anyone?_________________Privacy is a means to democracy, not an end in itself. - unknown
Sabotage the system. Provoke more questions! - unknown

...and the second most interesting thing is that wedgies won't count for holing out when the new rulebook is published...

if it is accepted....all discussion at this point

From cgkdisc on the PDGA forums:

Quote:

Items listed as Passed in the Status column will be included in the new rulebook effective Jan 1, 2011: http://pellucid.com/conrad/pdga/rules2011.html All renewed players will get one and I'm sure TDs will get a few in the TD pack prior to their events. Otherwise, they should be available for purchase in the PDGA Store.

Basket Target: A disc-catching device designed to clearly determine
completion of a hole. A basket target generally consists of the
following components:

Tray: A shallow open-topped receptacle into which the disc may fall or
be thrown. Also known as "basket".

Chains: A deflection assembly which is designed to deflect a thrown
disc down into the tray.

Chain Support: The structure from which the chains are suspended; a
deflector support which often forms the top of the target.

Pole: A central pipe or post which supports the other components.

Proposal 1B - Holing Out
------------------------

Rule 803.13.B: change

CURRENT

B. Disc Entrapment Devices: In order to hole out, the thrower must
release the disc and it must come to rest supported by the chains or
within one of the entrapment sections. This includes a disc wedged
into or hanging from the lower entrapment section but excludes a disc
resting on top of, or hanging outside of, the upper entrapment
section. The disc must also remain within the chains or entrapment
sections until removed.

PROPOSED

B. Disc Entrapment Devices: In order to hole out, the thrower must
release the disc and it must come to rest supported by the chains
and/or the inner cylinder (bottom and inside wall) of the tray. It may
be additionally supported by the pole. A disc observed by two or more
players of the group or an official to have entered the target below
the top of the tray or above the bottom of the chain support is not
holed out.
Note: If 1A does not pass, then replace "tray" with "lower entrapment
section", and "chain support" with "upper entrapment section".

Proposal 1C - Removal of Disc
-----------------------------

Rule 800: change

CURRENT

Holed-Out: A term used to signify completion of a hole. A player has
holed-out after the removal of the at rest disc from the chains or
entrapment area of a disc entrapment device or after striking the
marked area of the designated object target.

PROPOSED

Holed-Out: A term used to signify completion of a hole. See 803.13, Holing Out.

Serge, you have about 3 months to have fun with your Vibram putter._________________Boyle says BOOM!

Approximate Lie: A lie established by the player's group in order to
resume play: to correct a misplay from out-of-bounds (801.04 B (4)),
following the thrower's election to throw from the previous lie after
declaring a lie unplayable (803.06 A), ...

PROPOSED

Approximate Lie: A lie established by the player's group in order to
resume play: to correct a misplay from out-of-bounds (801.04 B (4)),
following the thrower's election to throw from the previous lie after
declaring an optional rethrow (803.06 A),

REMOVE

Unplayable Lie: A lie from which a player decides that obstacles to
stance or throwing motion make it impractical or unsafe to attempt a
throw. The lie is relocated with a penalty.

Proposal 4C - 803.03 Marking the Lie

CURRENT

B. A player is only required to mark the lie with a mini marker disc
when repositioning the lie under the rules. This includes the
following rules: out-of-bounds, disc above the playing surface, lost
disc, unplayable lie, relocated for relief, interference, or
repositioning the lie within 1 meter of the out-of-bounds line.

PROPOSED

B. A player is only required to mark the lie with a mini marker disc
when repositioning the lie under the rules. This includes the
following rules: out-of-bounds, disc above the playing surface, lost
disc, optional rethrow, relocated for relief, interference, or
repositioning the lie within 1 meter of the out-of-bounds line.

Proposal 4D
------------------

CURRENT

803.06 Unplayable Lie

A. A player may declare his or her lie to be an unplayable lie. The player is
the sole judge as to whether the lie is unplayable. The unplayable lie may be
relocated to a new lie that is: (1) No closer to the hole, on the line of play
and within five meters of the unplayable lie; or (2) The previous lie as
evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved, from an
approximate lie as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official. The
original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player's score.

PROPOSED

803.06 Optional Rethrow
At any time, a player may elect to rethrow from the previous lie as evidenced by
the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved, from an approximate lie
as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official. The original throw plus
one penalty throw are counted in the player's score.
Proposal 4E - 803.01.C Provisional Throws
------------------

CURRENT

... made as provisional throws prior to taking them. Provisional
throws are appropriate in the following circumstances:

PROPOSED

... made as provisional throws prior to taking them. A provisional
throw may not be subsequently declared to be an optional
rethrow. Provisional throws are appropriate in the following
circumstances:

What does "A provisional throw may not be subsequently declared to be an optional rethrow." mean?_________________Boyle says BOOM!

What does "A provisional throw may not be subsequently declared to be an optional rethrow." mean?

I'm guessing it's trying to eliminate the possibility of:
1)throwing a disc which may be OB or lost
2)throw a provisional throw to speed up play
3)find both to be usable but the provisional is much better and choose to use it instead of your first drive

The idea of an optional rethrow is horrible. It will destroy any impact bad rough will have on the game.

The idea of an optional rethrow is horrible. It will destroy any impact bad rough will have on the game.

It'll cost you the original throw, the second throw and a penalty throw...plus let's say I'm running a tournie at CF, and Person A throws into the creek on #13 and it's IB (cause I'm running the event) and doesn't want to get their feet wet, must WALK back up the mountain and throw what is essentially their 3rd throw (initial throw into the IB creek +1 stroke penalty for being a princess, and +for the throw they have to now make).

But it also opens up the possibility of instantly erasing horrible throws that will cost you more than two shots to recover from. For example the rough on hole 6 of Kanata. You toss one in there you are almost always going to be better off to take the penalty to rethrow.

I also don't like the slow downs that may occur as people walk down to find their disc and decide to go back and rethrow.

But it also opens up the possibility of instantly erasing horrible throws that will cost you more than two shots to recover from. For example the rough on hole 6 of Kanata. You toss one in there you are almost always going to be better off to take the penalty to rethrow.

I also don't like the slow downs that may occur as people walk down to find their disc and decide to go back and rethrow.

I see your point. I can't wait to see someone use this to their advantage. Karma would put the re-throw back in the shite. _________________Boyle says BOOM!

But it also opens up the possibility of instantly erasing horrible throws that will cost you more than two shots to recover from. For example the rough on hole 6 of Kanata. You toss one in there you are almost always going to be better off to take the penalty to rethrow.

I also don't like the slow downs that may occur as people walk down to find their disc and decide to go back and rethrow.

I see your point. I can't wait to see someone use this to their advantage. Karma would put the re-throw back in the shite.

I'm trying to work through this.

Old Ruling:

First throw - Person A throws on old #4 at Kanata. Attempts to go over the top and hits early and crashes into the shite.

Second throw - Now he's deep in the crap, tries to throw out, hits early and stays in the crap.

Third throw - Just throws out to open grass.

Fourth throw - Lay-up to basket

Fifth throw - In. Takes a 5.

New Ruling:

First throw - Person A throws on old #4 at Kanata. Attempts to go over the top and hits early and crashes into the shite. Decides it sucks so bad he's going to use the new rule and re-throw.

Second throw - isn't a throw but a penalty.

Third throw - Person A re-throws from tee and could possibly park it and take a 4, or is outside of 30' and Person A can't hit anything outside of 30' layups and takes a 5.

It could be an advantage or all it will save you is the trek through the woods.

In the end I'm going with it's a stupid rule. Play were it lies. Don't like it, don't throw it there. If it's unplayable then you take a 7 (just joking). If it's unplayable (bees nest, water fall, camp fire) then I don't know. Bad design?_________________Boyle says BOOM!

Unplayable lie is at the discretion of the thrower. Theoretically, under the 2006 rules, he can already declare unplayable lie, take the penalty, and rethrow for three off the tee.

803.06 wrote:

A. A player may declare his or her lie to be an unplayable lie. The player is the sole judge as to whether the lie is unplayable. The unplayable lie may be relocated to a new lie that is: (1) No closer to the hole, on the line of play and within five meters of the unplayable lie; or (2) The previous lie as evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved, from an approximate lie as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official. The original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player's score.

_________________Go Sens!

Last edited by lissyssil on Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total

Unplayable lie is at the discretion of the thrower. Theoretically, under the 2006 rules, he can already declare unplayable lie, take the penalty, and rethrow for three off the tee.

803.06 wrote:

A. A player may declare his or her lie to be an unplayable lie. The player is the sole judge as to whether the lie is unplayable. The unplayable lie may be relocated to a new lie that is: (1) No closer to the hole, on the line of play and within five meters of the unplayable lie; or (2) The previous lie as evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved, from an approximate lie as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official. The original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player's score.

Hmmm, so you could. But then it was called unplayable. Now the player can do it whenever they choose. If it's in the woods it's not "unplayable" it just sucks. Now a player can call a "just sucks" and re-throw. Takes away from the spirit of the game.

I know the player is the "sole judge" but at least you could ridicule him/her for their princess ways. Plus "unplayable" came with a definition: Unplayable Lie: A lie from which a player decides that obstacles to stance or throwing motion make it impractical or unsafe to attempt a throw. The lie is relocated with a penalty.

The ability to do a do-over with a penalty stroke is silly, but in line with the way the next generation deals with shite. "It's tough? Oh well, I'll just do it again."_________________Boyle says BOOM!

What does "A provisional throw may not be subsequently declared to be an optional rethrow." mean?

I'm guessing it's trying to eliminate the possibility of:
1)throwing a disc which may be OB or lost
2)throw a provisional throw to speed up play
3)find both to be usable but the provisional is much better and choose to use it instead of your first drive

I think I get it.

If you drive into the woods and you think you lost it/or it's OB, so you take a provisional throw, but then find it, but then think you'd rather re-throw because you're a princess and don't want to have to throw from under the pine tree, your provisional throw doesn't count as the re-throw so you have to back and re-throw...again?!? So you end up taking 3 drives off the tee? Huh? I have to go and re-read the article again to see why "unplayable" isn't good anymore._________________Boyle says BOOM!

I have to go and re-read the article again to see why "unplayable" isn't good anymore.

Quote:

It helps solve the "double penalty" problem, where the spot after an
OB or 2-meter penalty results in a horrible lie. The essential
difference is that the lie does not need to be determined before the
rethrow option can be taken. With the current rule, that's not clear
and hence the possibility of a double penalty remains.